The Pet (2006) User Reviews

take The Pet straight to the vet

[RavenGlamDVDCollector · 3/10 · 19 November 2016]

A movie about power exchange featuring bondage. Doomed from even before the word go, because nobody here knows what they are doing. The theme has crossed wires, the script is utterly lame, the acting is dull, the camera-work is bleak, the excitement is often off, and the performances are way under par. This thing is too tame to be an adult movie, yet its theme is highly controversial, guaranteed to upset everybody. So, to make it mainstream acceptable, director D. Stevens, who should never work in this town again as he just waists everybody's time, pulls back on the camera-work and makes it as visually appealing as close-circuit television, with images that are often static, frequently distant, or otherwise bland. The human body is, to put it mildly, very interesting. Mr. D. manages brilliantly to make nudity seem boring, for the most part anyway, although I absolutely love that bit "The Girls of The Pet" included as a filler at the end of the plodding main feature, where we get to see under-employed co-star Jane Steele do the Jane Seymour thing with her long, long red hair.

The theme also gets entangled with bad guy organ harvesters, as if the bondage BDSM set is the same, or at least, related thing. Does that community a disservice.

And those tiresome references likening her to a dog! Playing fetch, yapping, sniffing master's hand. Hell, nobody would regress to animal status overnight. The petting of the hair is real cute though.

It also subscribes to the Neanderthal notion that masters want their slaves/pets marked, their charges to crawl around on their knees, and to lick their shoes. I guess this might be prevalent on the real-life scene, appealing to those who are too dumb to think up better fantasies for themselves, but the lead character seemed to be a more refined intelligent type... Anyway, you would have to be very stupid, very dense indeed, to mess up your 'property' so oafishly. I mean, you pay a fortune, and immediately mess up your investment? Hey, would these masters buy a sports car and then drive it through the swamps?

Andrea Edmondson gamely tries. Hell, some story she could one day tell to her grandchildren (not).

Even with copious nudity, what goes on on- screen, is just about as dull as ditch-water and as tepid as last week's stale tea. An anemic production that's one big yawn.

The DVD's stylish box cover art showing the naked bound slave kneeling before her master, is the best thing about it. It is not the image shown here on IMDb, of course not. It is not even really part of the movie, it is obviously a borrowed image Breaking Glass obtained to make the packaging ultra-appealing, and lure in suckers like me. :(

To sum it up, the Master/slave genre might be coming into its own with FIFTY SHADES OF GREY, no doubt what motivated Breaking Glass to acquire the rights to this little bit of flotsam, quick to get onto the bandwagon. This one is unsalvagable junk, though, an example of what not to do. Tame, so as not to catch too much flak, bland, because of misdirection and utter incompetence - and worst of all, dumb to the core, as thick as three short planks.

Play Party Viewing Summary

[LngElgntLegs · 3/10 · 1 January 2007]

I watched this movie with a group last night who is familiar with BDSM. Personally, I feel the movie did BDSM an injustice. If I did not know better I would think that in order for someone to become involved in a "power exchange," they would have to be enticed with big money or some reason other than their need to be in a supportive and loving environment. A true BDSM relationship involves a "power exchange" which comes from the person's need to submit, a gift of submission to their Master or Dominant.

By mixing in the slave trade it only misinformed those who have no knowledge of this type of relationship, and who try to use fear tactics to make us look as if we are a danger to society. In no way did I feel that the movie showed any type of a growing relationship that would justify anyone giving up the degree of control that was displayed. Her devotion was bought and paid for.

One comment from the audience was that the acting was comparable to a porno flick. Being knowledgeable as to the true relationships involved in BDSM we could see through the errors. For someone not familiar, it would only make them think that BDSM is a horrible thing. I would not recommend this movie to anyone outside of the BDSM scene.

Just awful

[msbehavin_brat · 1/10 · 26 December 2006]

The acting is terrible. The plot makes no sense. This movie attempts to explore 2 relevant & infinitely interesting topics...a type of D/s relationship & human slave trafficking. Unfortunately, it doesn't come close to doing either justice. It attempts to intertwine the two in a way that makes no sense. The D/s side comes off as typical fantasy...the woman is offered large sums of money by a rich man to try being his kept-nude & in a cage pet & she likes it. Now, I'm not against a well-done fantasy portrayal, but this isn't it. In the movie's defense, it does attempt to show a D/s relationship as a loving one with mutual consent & benefit (besides the monetary). But that doesn't begin to save the film. We are asked to believe that one day she is perfectly lucid & signing contracts & the next day she has no cognitive abilities except those of a dog. BTW, if you have a RL dog, you know that most of them have a whole lotta cognitive ability LOL. This is only one of it's many, many problems.

As for it's attempt to touch on the abhorrent practice of the human slave trade, it touches on it briefly in a way that makes no sense in the context of the movie. I had such high hopes for this film & the trailer made it look so exciting. I wanted to love it. Instead, when I wasn't laughing, I was just stunned by how bad it was. Don't waste your time! And definitely don't waste your money!

Bad Bad Acting

[hotcandie6 · 1/10 · 11 January 2010]

Yes there were problems with the plot, but the acting was so bad I could not stand to watch the entire movie. The main character was just plain pathetic. I think someone could have convinced to chop off her own hands for the hell of it. Oh and who did wardrobe? He is wealthy so he wears nothing but a very out of style suit for the first part of the movie (the same one day after day). Obviously the wardrobe person or director never met a wealthy man. She also wears only two very unstylish outfits before she becomes his pet. Really this movie is not worth watching. I also found that the situation was very unrealistic. At first he is going to go buy some girl from the slave trade that the animal shelter people don't notice is in a cage. Then he is not doing that but instead wooing his soon to be pet instead. I just can't believe how much these characters just did not make any sense.

This movie was INSULTING

[masterphoenix-1 · 1/10 · 6 April 2007]

As a member of the BDSM community, I have to say that this movie was complete trash. D Stevens had supposedly worked with people in this lifestyle and alleges that this movie would show the lifestyle in a positive light.

I am sorry, but equating a consensual slave who has agreed to be in a Dominant submissive lifestyle with someone who is killed so their organs can be sold is NOT sending a positive message. This movie is a plot mess, and the acting is wooden (I am being kind as most wooden statues have better acting range than the cast of this film) with the exception of the ladies who played the pets. (They seemed to be much better at playing the pet roles than they were when playing the non pet portion of their characters.) Sadly, Mr Stevens stated goal of exposing the international human trafficking could be much better addressed by leaving the consensual slavery of the BDSM lifestyle out of it and focus solely on the non consensual slavery he was supposed to be exposing.

Erotic Story with Bad Acting

[georgiagin · 19 December 2006]

The acting wasn't great...Andrea Edmondson sounded as she was reading most of her lines but the story it's self was what draws you in. The only movie you can compare it to is The Secretary which was the first BDSM to hit the mainstream. I actually liked this movie better than The Secretary. I enjoyed the eroticism of it -the time it took to show how a person can become someone's pet. If you can go into it with an open mind, you can allow all types of possibilities to emerge.

There are inherent storyline flaws but I overlooked them. The ownership was erotic to me, the branding, the cage it's self. (A triangle cage does NOT look comfortable!) I feel people outside of the "scene" will not appreciate it (if they see it at all) but for those into BDSM, it's a welcome addition. Not the end all be all, but certainly a start into what will hopefully be a growing genre.

Could have been so much better

[jjblue619 · 2/10 · 20 January 2007]

This movie could've been so much more. As a member of the BDSM community, I have seen first hand the loving relationships between Masters and their pets.

This movie could have informed the audience about these relationships, about the growth of both people involved, their character development, and there could have even been subplots of action or care or intrigue without involving a contrived, convoluted, and ultimately damaging subplot involving human trafficking, a horrific and reprehensible practice that has nothing to do with 99.9% of the BDSM community.

It was obvious that the film makers have some knowledge of the dynamics of a Master/human pet relationship. But they wrapped it up in bad acting, bad dialogue, and bad story telling.

Oh Dear Mother of God, I will watch 50 Shades instead of watching this again

[dan_counts · 1/10 · 2 June 2017]

I really will watch 50 Shades of Gray, Dark, Free and Black on a continuous loop instead of watching this ever, ever, ever again. There is so much wrong here. Acting so stiff that it makes Hayden Christensen seem like Tom Hanks. A script so badly written that it reads like the abortion of a one-night stand between EL James, M. Night Shyamalan and Vincent Gallo. Camera work that makes Uwe Boll seem like Igmar Bergman.

I should have known I was in for a stinker when I see that the writer/director just uses a first initial. Makes sense, if I was attached to this, I would want to hide it as much as possible also. But D. Stevens, you wrote this steaming pile of manure, sack up and OWN it.

So in short, this is a story about a boy that loses his dog and then thinks to himself, "Hey if I did it so well with a dog, why not a human being?"

And yes kids, there are people that crave that type of objectification. However, you don't see anyone really make this type of leap of logic unless their names are Ed Gein or Jeffrey Dahmer.

Enter Sammy Jr showing off a girl in a cage to the aforementioned boy, but surprise, surprise the girl has more tracks on her arm than a train yard. But he wants a girl that isn't a junkie (in all fairness who doesn't). So then Sammy sends the boy a picture of a girl, and she's PERFECT.

So our lonely boy Philip meets our girl Mary at her flower stand and Mary has had a very bad day. Cat died, boyfriend beat the cat, and she's got an eviction notice, basically her life sucks without the drugs.

So Phil, I think Phil is a better name for this guy, bails her out with 10k out of his back pocket (well with a cashier's check), plus an extra 500 just for taking her to dinner and invites her to his place to bury her dead cat. If he was going to go through all the trouble of digging a grave and getting a kitty coffin for a cat he didn't even own, then why couldn't he spring for a black gospel choir singing Amazing Grace?

Fast forward through her 3 day training montage, and then they go up to Utah so Mary can have the doggie Olympics against Taps (don't worry the film does a crapalicious job of explaining it), where you find out that Phil is part of a human trafficking network and Mary (having been renamed to GG by Phil) is a universal donor that would bring good money on the market.

Somehow Phil loses his proof of ownership to GG and his buddy that owns Taps picks up the proof and sells GG off.

Seriously, it's so stupid at this point, you really want to scratch your eyes out. I pray to God that D. Stevens is never, ever given the reins to a film or writes another screenplay again, seriously, if he does, it will be considered a crime against humanity and we will need to lock his entire family up for the good of the human race.

Abysmally poor in every respect

[paulswm · 1/10 · 23 February 2007]

Breathtakingly, stunningly bad. Production values seem to be even lower than the average adult movie.

Total acting skills displayed by all participants: close to zero. Poor shooting, directing, editing, script, DVD transfer, etc. If anybody connected with this movie was paid more than bus fares and lunch money, they were overpaid.

Some movies are bad, but entertaining because they are bad. Not so with this turkey.

The only reason I gave it one star is because there isn't a zero-star voting option.

Buyer be forewarned!

[wildfleurs · 1/10 · 8 December 2006]

I bought the Pet and I really don't think it was remotely worth the money. The acting is not very good (the actors are very stiff and seem to be reading verbatim from cue cards, the quality of filming and cinematography is pretty poor, and the plot literally does not make sense (why do they need to train women to be human animals if they just want someone's kidneys? why would someone hang around people who sell body parts from pets if you have a pet, wouldn't you be just a little concerned about your own pets safety?).

After watching the movie, I understand exactly why it wasn't distributed; Blue Velvet was more disturbing in terms of content so I know it wasn't the excessively boring nudity and crawling in the movie that made it untouchable. It was really just the poor quality of the movie itself.

Personally I wouldn't have bothered with the movie if I knew all this beforehand, so buyer be warned!

A very good movie for alternate lifestyle people.

[cnrm · 8/10 · 25 February 2008]

If you're into Master/slave alternate lifestyle and BDSM, this movie is for you. The two leads are perfectly cast - Andrea Edmondson who is very believable as the submissive human pet and Pierre Dulat who brings European sophistication to his role of master. When those two are on screen, the movie works. The rest of the cast is not up to their standards and the early part of the story is lacking and the ending is even worse, but the middle hour of this movie is really excellent with the interaction between the two leads. Andrea is nude for most of the film, but it's so natural that you won't even notice after the first few minutes. If you're not into alternate lifestyles, this movie will leave you cold because clearly this movie was aimed at a very narrowly focused audience and it hits a bulls-eye with them.

Interesting Premise , good actress, but not quite there

[carvohi · 7/10 · 18 April 2011]

The movie The Pet has an intriguing premise, but it fails in some important ways. They have a terrific young actress in Barbara Edmondson who delivers just the right amount of innocence and pluck. She was very good. Her character gets off to a good start, but unwinds as the story progresses. She just doesn't get enough to say, especially later in the movie when we most want to hear her. The end left me flat.The story was about a pet, the complications that arose were interesting, even tense at times, but we lose sight of our heroine, and the conversation lines were often too weak. I felt like the writers lost sight of what they wanted to do; some serious outside input for later scenes would have made this a great story.They could have done more with this story; they certainly had the right actress for it. I'd recommend the movie just to watch her; not for the nudity but for her interesting delivery.

Beyond stupid

[digger-06358 · 2/10 · 20 June 2019]

To start I do not think this movie represents any kind of BDSM relationship. He buys her to be his pet. She apparently is so desperate for money that she accepts it from him seemingly without strings attached. He then mentions that she could try being a pet. People in this lifestyle don't on a whim decide that they should give this a try. She really doesn't even know what she is signing up for. She is kept in a torturous triangle cage where she can't even sleep on the floor. Just the bars on the bottom of the cage. Who would treat something so precious in such an abhorrent way. Rather than wake her from what seems to be her endless sleep he uses her shock collar instead. His idea of a pet goes from potential love to pain in seconds and she doesn't even do anything wrong. Whens she does wet the floor and deserves pain she gets nothing but a "bad dog".

The actors, while not great, look good doing their thing. Maybe with a decent script they would be much better.

The ending was far too rushed with little story to fit the ending. He manages to take her owners tag out of his pocket at a meeting of other owners with pets and drops it on the floor in front of her face. Rather than say anything, and with him oblivious to the fact that he dropped the most important thing he had, another owner picks it up and uses it to sell her even though he knows the rightful owner would never sell. Suddenly some clowns arrive to take her away to be used as a heart donor. She ends up being retained by her original owner but dies soon after being saved. Basically that is the end.

For anyone to claim that this portrays any aspect of an alternative lifestyle is a joke. This is fiction of a guy that pays a woman to be his dog and she ends up dying because of his carelessness. There is no lifestyle choice.

Truly awful

[ukTanos · 7 January 2007]

(Leaving aside the awful, wooden acting, the incoherent plot and the plodding script.)

The production company attempted to hype this on BDSM web boards and forums as being a "lifestyle movie", whilst on their website claiming that it was an Important Film dealing with the modern day scandal of human trafficking. Trying to ride those two horses is evident by their mixing up of the trappings of consensual BDSM with modern people smuggling and human organ trading. As such, they smear BDSM while providing a totally unconvincing picture of modern day slavery.

If the audience were to be persuaded of anything by this effort, it's the distortion that consensual BDSM is about exploiting vulnerable people, and that human traffickers are cartoon villains who talk like refugees from a cheap porno movies.

A Review of "The Pet"

[sharkboy007 · 1/10 · 28 February 2009]

For anyone who comes here to read comments about this horrible celluloid abortion, please skip over the post titled "My Musings on The Pet".

I actually made the mistake of reading this pretentious tripe, and there's only one conclusion that can be drawn from this person's post: he's one of those imbeciles that spend all their free time role playing as a "Gorean". None of that lifestyle "information" he spewed can be taken seriously by anyone who seriously practices said lifestyle. He needs to just shut up and go back to drinking from his sip-pee cup, and not interrupt the adults. Go back to Gor and never enter the daylight with the rest of the normal people!!

***Caution! The following contains spoilers, read at your own risk! (Scroll down if you wish to read the rest of the review, spoiler free)***

This movie is absolutely horrible. It does not show the lifestyle in a positive light, and pretty much makes a mockery of the human slave trade. The main male character is a poor excuse for a human being whose only reason for taking a slave is because his dog died. Really? Really? And you know, it's pretty sad that the dog lived longer than the girl. The main female character is an idiot. She does all this stuff that doesn't even begin to make sense. Sitting on the floor at a restaurant? Yeah, like that happens all the time by people in the lifestyle. And through this entire movie, these people were getting into situations that they could have easily called the police on.

And then there's the scenes in which there's some sort of slaver's convention/party/bat cave, complete with the web servers that have the website for slave flesh speculation. In Utah of all places! This "master" doesn't want to sell his pet, so he brings along her ownership tag. To a get together in which they're what? SELLING SLAVES!! Then, he "accidentally" drops it, and somehow, the "pet" is too stupid to not go "um, hello? you just dropped this tag" And it only gets worse.

The best part, though, HAD to be the redneck who was doing the Slingblade impression. If he had busted out with something like, "He sure does like his pets branded, mm hum", I would not have been the least bit surprised.

***END OF SPOILERS***

If you are into the lifestyle and looking for a good lifestyle movie, or one that presents it in a positive light, this movie is not for you. If you are looking for a good movie that touches on the tragedy of the slave trade, this movie is not for you. If you are someone who enjoys movies, this movie is not for you. If, however, you are someone who spends their free time pretending to be a master or Gorean, and have somehow gotten the idea that you have any reason to speak, then this movie is perfect for you.

About the only thing this movie would be good for is for those people who are in a coma. Play this movie, and they're sure to come out of the coma, even if it's just to beat you for making them suffer through this horrible excuse for wasting people's time.

a story about how someone become a slave

[xsxces · 1/10 · 5 February 2007]

this is a very low production. like an American b movie. i didn't know that and that was disappointing for me. you can tell right away.

i've never reviewed a movie here but this one made me register and then write all this. and not because it's good.

let me tell you what happens in the very beginning when the 2 main characters meet. i'm assuming that's not a spoiler but if you think so, please move ahead.

a girl is having some financial trouble(can't pay the rent, etc). a guy walks up to a flower stand where the girl is working. he sorta, SORTA, smooth talks her and she agrees to go eat w/ him. at the diner, he hears her story and offers her some money and says this is for nothing in return.

they converse and she's now back at her apartment where she "flashes" back to her experience in the diner which shows her walking toward/approaching the guy's side of the booth(they sit in a booth facing each other at first) and asks if she can try his ice cream. he doesn't budge inward at all and she asks if she's supposed to eat on the floor. he says if you'd like, then i can feed you. she sits on the floor leaning on his seat and he feeds her a spoonful. THIS IS THE LITERAL SCENE! nothing more or less. happens in about 5 minutes or less.

my point is, there's no development of any kind. story and character. they just happen really fast. not like action movie fast. but pre mature ejac fast.

the concept is pretty promising. people who seem to like it seem to really like it. but...it's like having a feast in front of you but having to eat it in 5 mins. i'm not really into the s/m, d/s, BNDG kinda thing but i can appreciate those when done tastefully. this is really not in that class.

acting is pretty bad. i thought the story would draw me in eventually like another reviewer said but not for me. i've read a movie script before and those pages had more detail and emotion than the scenes in this movie.

Absolutely dreadful and a waste of time

[mawcin · 1/10 · 26 February 2016]

I read about this movie on some shady blog and came here to read reviews. I should've listened... but instead I spent 84 minutes watching this "movie." Not worth it. After the first 10 minutes I was already in deep shock and it was only worse later on. Story was coherent... up to certain point, because later it was confusing and simply terrible. Is it truthful? No. Is it believable? Absolutely not. Are the actors believable? Never. Is it distasteful? Yes. Does the movie have a message in it? Well... it has potential to have a message and to teach us something, but either you're showing the "true" face of BDSM, or you're fighting human trafficking. Don't do both in the same movie. If they really spent a million dollars on this movie, they need to go back to elementary school.

A terrible waste of time!

[stitt69 · 1/10 · 26 December 2006]

ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE! I just went through and sampled the movie, the actors make B-rate porn stars look like Oscar contenders. The audio sounds awful, and half the time the actors lips don't even move to produce the sound. It's blatantly obvious that they're in a sound studio reading their lines which are then haphazardly meshed with the video.

I'm glad I didn't pay to see it! Not sure why anyone would rate this movie as anything other than awful, even as a softcore porn it's done a poor job.

Avoid this title as it is a total waste of time.

This is not bdsm!!!!

[meghana-meggy · 2/10 · 21 June 2014]

I just finished watching this movie, just because I found it on some site listed as one of the "Top ten best B.D.S.M. movies" but I regret watching it. I now realize how few movies have actually been made about the alternate lifestyle that even this shitty excuse for a movie had to be listed as one of the 10 best and this realization makes me sad.

The review I am writing is from the viewpoint of a person who has been involved in the alternate lifestyle for more than 2 years and I will not be commenting about the human trafficking aspect of the movie as I do not possess adequate knowledge about human trafficking and slave trade.

**** Spoilers ahead ******************

The problems I had with the movie are following: 1. A person does not get a slave just because his dog died. That's insulting because that is comparing a human being and an animal.

2. A master/Dominant does not "play fetch" with his slave. She is not a dog, you idiot!!!!!!!!!!!

3. The reason that the female lead starts serving her master/Dom seems as though she is doing it for money and this lifestyle is not something that you can do for money. There needs to be a lot more emotional connection and a lot more clarity of consensus between the sub- dom/master-slave for it to be classified as an alternate lifestyle or B.D.S.M., which was obviously missing between the leads, which I don't know if I should blame on bad acting or bad writing. But if emotion and consensus are lacking in such relationships, then it simply isn't BDSM. It's slavery/abuse/prostitution/human rights violation, which is not B.D.S.M.

3. The most important thing that is W-R-O-N-G with this movie is- A master/dominant takes care of his slave/sub. So a thoughtful master would never ever let his partner eat just a handful of food from his hand and drink just a few sips of water a day after making his partner work and run and crawl all day. A good master/Dom would never let his partner be naked in a snowy place no matter what because that's dangerous to the slave/sub's health. A good master/Dom would not let his slave sleep in such a small cage every night after making her crawl all day, since at least at night the slave/sub would need to straighten her legs or it might be damaging to her knees and health. All this is not alternate lifestyle. It is torture and ignorance on the master/Dom's part. This is very very wrong and portrays the lifestyle as something it isn't. B.D.S.M. is not torture!!!!!

Having said all this, the really bad acting and the non existent script are not the worst aspects of the movie, but the whole idea behind the movie is. The makers should have done their homework before making this extended porn movie. W-A-I-T!! Calling this porn is an insult to porn because this "video" ain't even arousing to say the least.

I gave it 2 stars, 1- for "only trying" to make something about human trafficking 2- for the female actresses who had to go naked all through the video. Even if they are paid for it, being in this kind of movie is not worth it. And Andrea Edmondson at least tried to act. Her acting is the only thing remotely bearable in the video and it's not an achievement.

Comparing this movie with the likes of Secretary is also an insult to Secratary because it is like comparing a video(The Pet) with a movie (The Secretary)

Quite a fascinating exercise in power dynamics

[dfc-10 · 9/10 · 12 June 2007]

I was more than impressed by this very different exploration into human dynamics. I am more than impressed by the resounding polarization of people who have taken the time to review this movie.

I hesitated to write about The Pet because I am not a reviewer of any stretch of the imagination but I found the galvanizing affect of those from I guess the Bondage/Discipline community seem really having a problem in a film that some perceive as depicting a "lifestyle". Well for one who does not care for fetishism or such - get over it - the Pet is a well made movie; maybe not by the American standards of spoon fed potpourri of car chases, CSI investigations or the horror/slash genres. I really do not think it dealt with the BDSM thing at all.

To me it was well crafted and layered - showing character's strength and weaknesses as well as the evil and good in our so often manufactured lives controlled by powers that we do not know even exists.

I thought the acting was thoughtful, deliberate and engaging. Not growing up in America may have given me a different perspective but I really did get the vintage thoughtfulness of Bergman and Kubrick (Wild Strawberries and Clockwork Orange respectively).

I decided to write after watching The Pet an additional viewing. This time I watched it with several friends and indeed we talked about it for quite some time.

Unusual perspective

[paul-ayres-60784 · 6/10 · 19 August 2018]

This a very unusual perspective on a serious human issue, trafficking. I think it takes the subject matter seriously enough as it doesn't paint a rosey picture. However, the main topic of the movie is the girl's (not victim) willingness to comply. The movie has atmosphere, an intriguing story and is well filmed. The acting is surprisingly good and it is well directed. I can't see why it has been rated so low!

Strong content that makes you think

[naturalslv · 10/10 · 21 December 2006]

I felt The Pet opened up a genre heretofore not felt in some time. It provokes a disturbing blend of power exchange and an almost surreal alternative universe reminding me of 'Eyes Wide Shut' and sort of a 'King of Hearts' plot.

It moved me greatly and I have reflected on my own life because of what I saw as pulling back the covering or turning over a rock of a hidden world of greed and exploitation that on the surface does not seem apparent. The movie shows a positive side of a different kind of relationship that grows on soiled ground.

I thought the acting with both lead characters being new and unknown were outstanding. The idea that not one but two actresses can play two adult characters and then be renamed and become two believable puppies in the same movie - outstanding and kudos -- what a challenge. The eyes of The Pet was mesmerizing at times - her trust was evident and her enthusiasm to please was pronounced. The lead actor, Philip, was believable and scarily familiar in the Hollywood world of people pretending to be one thing and turning out to be something or someone else entirely. I would not want to be in the same room as the evil Colonel - he was frightening.

The nice thing about the acting is you could see characters grow, Philip was changed by his pet - by 'owning' her he had to accept responsibility for his own exploitative ways. I do give a two thumbs up

My Musings on the Pet

[simonblaise · 10/10 · 20 December 2006]

After the initial shock, for the mainstream lifestylers a.k.a. "newbies," who are under the mistaken, but albeit understandable, impression that the BDSm lifestyle, be it leather or non-leather, must, by definition, include a St. Andrews Cross at some private home/club/dungeon or a pair of floggers and leather pants, wears off, many will begin to see just how much of a lifestyle movie "The pet" is in both substance and form.

Believe it or not, years from now, this is a movie that will be spoken of in the same regard as movies "Story of O" and "Secretary." Why? Compared to the two other movies just mentioned, "The pet" comes the closest, ever in My humble opinion, to authentically portraying what one possible 24/7 Master and slave relationship would look like – this relationship happens to use an Owner/pet dynamic to express the M/s relationship.

And I note the Master did have the pet sign a slave contract after all. ;) Moreover, and contrary to popular belief, there are many different and unique relationships in the lifestyle worldwide that do not exactly fit into a Master and slave paradigm. For example, one relationship may involve three people, Master A owning slave A, and slave A also being a Master to another slave, slave B, and all of this working harmoniously under one roof. With that said, "The pet" is but one of the many types of relationships that can manifest upon a foundation of BDSm. It is through this lens "The pet" is best, if not properly, viewed.

To be quite candid, the acting overall is not going to be up for an academy award this time around – but this actually helps make the movie seem more real. The people who played the Master and the pet did an outstanding job, especially the pet. Edmondson, the actress who played the pet, is not properly depicted in any of the promotional material, and probably for good reason on a personal level, as taking on this role was certainly a risky venture in the uptight "fantasy vanilla world" where no one is as they seem – and having her face plastered everywhere might raise problems with the hypocrites that plague that fantasy world. If that would not have been a problem for her, then this was a serious error in judgment. Edmondson is stunning to just look at, a solid 9 in My peculiar book, and her face on the cover and posters would have attracted more attention. Also, for someone who is not into the lifestyle, her acting is so convincing that I am sure watching this movie would move some seasoned Masters to believe Edmondson is probably slaving in her private life – I cannot say I was so fooled. ;) The actor, who portrays the Master, Du Lat, fit the role of an eccentric man of wealth well and portrayed those of his ilk in the real world of the lifestyle with impressive accuracy. His love of his previous pet, an actual canine, inspired him to seek out a similar relationship with a fellow human being – and showing amazing depth and understanding of the complexity of the lifestyle, the Master character does not have a sexual relationship with his pet. It is one of service, which can be just as pleasing, if not more so.

An interesting contrast between the subtleties of fiction and reality is the fact the pet was paid/offered large sums of money for her submission/agreement to serve him as his pet – in reality, and more often than not, no such payment is required, and interestingly enough, a woman will give everything she has and more to be at the foot of a Master. I also appreciated how quickly the pet character submitted and fell into her new role, because, as hard as it may be for a vanilla person/mainstream lifestyler to believe, when a woman finds a Master she can surrender to, she submits wholly and with great haste – something the Master must handle with great care. Towards the end of the movie, and with great credit to D. Stevens, it is made clear that the money is meaningless to the pet and that all she wants in the world is to be at her Master's feet.

In the end, it was the Master's Pride that ripped His happiness away, just as it does for Us all in the lifestyle time and time again in one way or another. For budding Masters and Dominants, the lesson concerning the destructive nature of Pride makes this movie a must see. I also suggest the Shakespearian poem: "The Rape of Lucrece." Although the intent of the movie was to bring the international slave trade to light, which is did and did surprisingly well, My humble opinion is that this movie's greatest impact will be how it heightens a much needed awareness of not only the existence of the lifestyle for vanillas plugged in and trapped in their fantasy based prison, but it will also raise a much needed awareness of the rich diversity that exists in the lifestyle itself in the minds of T/those in the leather and non-leather BDSm communities alike who are similarly trapped in cliques paradigms.

S.

The Plan 9 from Outer Space of BDSM movies

[sincity208 · 7 June 2021]

This movie is genius out the other direction. It's so dumb and poorly made that it becomes entertaining. Its portrayal of BDSM is so clearly incorrect and offensive that even someone who is not apart of the community, could tell this is a gross misrepresentation of that community. Boy is it amusing though! The self seriousness and self importance is laughable! My suggestion is to get either drunk or high and watch this - you'll have a good time!

Outstanding

[iownproperty1234 · 10/10 · 30 January 2007]

I just liked the story and the acting - I watched it with some friends and we talked about it for hours -- it is a lot to bring out in the open. NO one had a consensus - it was just thoughtful -- and complex. It goes well below the surface of just entertainment.

I noticed so many issues that I deal with in the world daily. Like power plays in business -- who is the bully and who is the low man at the office. My wife had issues with it at first and then she saw a scene with males slaves and she appreciated it was a non gender base issue. Slavery comes in all kinds in this movie - from the girl who window shops eventually become a secretary. Several male labor slaves are punished for trying to escape while other slaves accept their condition and are seemingly resigned to their life of servitude or as 'pets'. All in all a very disturbing movie - it gets under your skin because in the end it looks beautiful and it is easy to see how some of the 'missing' people in current news may have bonded with their captors.

I did like that a love story was developed in a way that is quite difficult to imagine. I tended to really like seeing something so unique happen.

A very intriguing piece of work - I do look forward to seeing something more from this director and the actors